"Are they really against Oligarchs? Or pitting one against the other Oligarch?"

"Are they really against Oligarchs?

Or pitting one against the other Oligarch?"

(Or: "Of Duterte, his Apologists, and the Good vs Bad Oligarchs over utilities")

It seems becoming impossible to refrain from encountering their statements, reactions, and modes of thought being vented upon by Duterte's fanatics.

For ever since Duterte was elected in 2016 and his partymates and allies won last 2019, its apologists, being great numbers, are rather still short sighted beings who feel that the situation under their leader can resolve every matter, while the fact is that this kind of thinking hath playeth directly into the hands of the elites allying with Duterte, who're all trying desperately to hold the prevailing order together "as long as possible" to fool and exploit Filipinos while pretending having immense changes. And based on their comments these would say that they all wished either for bloodshed against the opposition, no matter they disregard issues on debt "since development is in full swing", of blaming so-called "bad oligarchs" while justify oppressive agreements, or the usual myriad of red taggings, red herrings, and under the belt hecklings that instead of a call for an "inclusive unity" they wished is a call for an enforced order that even benefits the "oligarchs" allied with their dear leader Duterte.

And it is quite usual for these populists for knowing that there are times they demand to "put oligarchs into justice" as any other statement of theirs, what more that with their idol who he put them at par with the rebel and the dealer altogether as criminals and therefore as "enemies of the people". For sure may preach to and fro about this matter, alweaving everything "against Duterte" as they trying to appease everyone when in fact they just point primarily towards the opposition for all their woes more than the criminals and the "oligarchs" they talked about.

And in speaking of "Oligarchs", Duterte and his supporters may've pointed names like Manny Pangilinan of Metro Pacific, Zobel de Ayala, and the Lopezes of ABS CBN all for exploiting Filipinos, but, come to think of this: how about San Miguel's Danding Cojuangco and its stooge Ramon Ang? Phoenix's Dennis Uy? Or even the Villar couple who owns the subdivisions that was once ricefields? Duterte seemed to parrot some "leftist rhetoric" against those "oligarchs" who are against him, while still in connivance with the elites especially those who supported and funded him during the 2016 elections.

Because of this "bad" vs "good" oligarch matter, like the issue on criminality, corruption, and all the likes surrounding Duterte and his camarilla, this is going to do nothing to "fight against the oligarchy", "make major and immense changes", or even "bring justice" but only to increase the degree of its hold over every individual in a way their statements creates an excuse and a plausible cover for the creation of a police state apologists wished for.

How come this is going to do nothing? Duterte's apologists cried angst towards opposition-inclined oligarchs like those stated from above, however, they failed to offer a sound alternative such as from the Left with its Nationalisation of utilities. Some would even wished for a foreign-owned conglomerate to fully take over, thinking that Filipinos as altogether incompetent, making them say "they've had enough of 'Filipino First'" and to tell the people that they should follow the market for a direction since "they don't need the government to decide for the people" but instead reduce its role to a fencesitter.

But most of these apologists said nothing to offer for an alternative to this "oligarch-owned" utility companies that created a mess-unless parroting a statement coming from their idol who wished for his ally to take over one or another, and if happens, then there's no difference between an "administration-backed oligarch" and an "opposition-supported oligarch", both of them are oligarchs in the first place, belonging to an elite regardless of its backgrounds yet benefited from the order the people wished to dismantle for something new.

And in speaking again about those who demand further opening at the expense of national patrimony, that their words are much aligned towards their obvious idea of reducing nation states into mere demographics as they see the economy being a multinational matter with the market as its focus. Ideas such reducing the role of the state into a fencesitter, of uncontrolled flow of foreign capital, and the right for foreigners to establish business all without regulations including the right to exploit resources, these and more would say it wouldn't be surprised that these self-proclaimed "economic experts" with all their neoliberal-globalist tendencies are wishing to have the foreigner's right to property, to remove restrictions on labor, and to use the power of the state to restrict people's movements just to maintain their interests firmer as those of the oligarch.

Thus, there is no difference between a foreign moneylender and a domestic oligarch. Whether the name is Rothschild, Lehman, Tan, Kung, Villar or Ayala, so long as it oppresses the people with their unjust policies then it fails to show development. 

Thus, with these situations and beyond, it is unsurprising for like the past administrations, this present order used fear and false hopes, of classical carrot and stick tactics, of aggravating situations as prequels to an undemocratic order with its negation of people's rights; and if it can again use these issues just to get one to agree with their whims, these are only to turn right around and use it on that person especially after getting concerned from those ever-continuing killings to those of price increases.

And also with these scenarios would say that the struggle of the folk will still continue like the protest marches the order and its apologists would cry wolf about.